Do I need DSD?

[Jud]

This has become a popular idea. Unfortunately it isn't really true.

Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: TEAC UD-501 DSD Performance (Part 3)

 

Here you can view measurements and see DSD64 and DSD128 outputs are not the same as PCM outputs. While true that most DACs convert to Sigma Delta internally, the method of filtering used that way with PCM input differs vs handling DSD input, and results of what you hear are different as well. So PCM thru these Teac DACs is not listening to DSD.

 

With PCM input, you're listening to the *internal* DAC chip conversion of PCM to DXD, then to a low bit depth MHz sample rate DSD-*like* bitstream prior to conversion to analog. As you say, DSD input resulted in different output, which is the reason people buy DSD or use software conversion.

[mordante]

Ah - and you miss one of the best things about DSD - much less expensive equipment does DSD very very well. You might consider trying a less expensive DSD DAC.

 

Okay. My streamer costed my about 1000euro. The two R2R DACs in which I am interested cost about 1300euro. Making 2600euro in total. What streamer which can resample to DSD 256 and which chip less dac will that buy me? The cheapest Mac mini costs 600euro in the Netherlands. Not sure if it has the computing power needed.

[mordante]

I went in the opposite direction - a Lampizator 4 with DSD Only. I convert all signals to DSD256.

 

The Lampizator team, on their website and elsewhere online, have stated that DSD (and their chipless DSD in particular) is the best sounding D to A conversion they offer. They are fans of using a server to convert all signals to DSD in real time before sending them to the DAC.

 

In fact, they've begun to offer all of their models without PCM conversion, as on option.

 

While lamp I gear might be nice. It is bloody expensive. The 4 DSD256 DSD only is 2900 then add 23% vat. That is more the I can or would be willing to spend on a dac.

[matthias]

Okay. My streamer costed my about 1000euro. The two R2R DACs in which I am interested cost about 1300euro. Making 2600euro in total. What streamer which can resample to DSD 256 and which chip less dac will that buy me? The cheapest Mac mini costs 600euro in the Netherlands. Not sure if it has the computing power needed.

 

For the price of this Mac mini you get the latest Intel Skylake NUC with better computing power for HQPlayer.

 

Matt

[matthias]

While lamp I gear might be nice. It is bloody expensive. The 4 DSD256 DSD only is 2900 then add 23% vat. That is more the I can or would be willing to spend on a dac.

 

For PCM and DSD you get the very good Gieseler Klein DAC II from Australia for AUD 1000.

 

Matt

[beerandmusic]

Question>>Do I need DSD?

 

Answer>> only if you want the best SQ format that is available today.

[mordante]

Question>>Do I need DSD?

 

Answer>> only if you want the best SQ format that is available today.

 

According to your humble opinion. I've heard some pcm resampled to DSD by the top Lumin streamers. I did not think it sounded better compared to pcm. Just different.

[Hazard]

For PCM and DSD you get the very good Gieseler Klein DAC II from Australia for AUD 1000.

 

Matt

All my gear is DIY including my DSD Dac (ok i actually did buy a blu ray player. And a TV). So I don't follow what's happening in the commercial world. But I have to say - these are great looking products and for the price, DIY is almost redundant! As an Aussie I can say that I am really surprised to see such a high quality product being manufactured right here only 20km from where I live. Hopefully there will be more to come.

 

Sent from my SM-G900I using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[Rexp]

According to your humble opinion. I've heard some pcm resampled to DSD by the top Lumin streamers. I did not think it sounded better compared to pcm. Just different.

I heard it with the DCS Vivaldi and agree sound is different not better.

[徐中銳]

I've heard some pcm resampled to DSD by the top Lumin streamers. I did not think it sounded better compared to pcm. Just different.

 

Subtlety of words, conception, what Hiro quoted refers to the goal of less signal-processing :

[ishiwata says his enthusiasm for DSD ‘has nothing to do with the original recording format or quality – it’s simply due to the fact that the majority of today’s D-to-A converter chips are utilising Delta/Sigma technology.]

 

As Ken Ishiwata said:

 

‘DSD can by-pass certain processing within those [delta-sigma] D-to-A converter chips, so you …. get a less processed signal with DSD compared to PCM, which of course will influence the sound quality.’

 

https://andreweverard.com/2013/09/24/review-marantz-na-11s1-a-very-good-thing-worth-the-very-long-wait/

 

Interestingly, as the article reports, "Ishiwata is also an advocate of upconverting existing CD-quality files to the DSD format in the computer, and then playing them back through a DSD DAC such as the NA-11S1."

 

As you've probably heard, his upcoming reference SA10 SACD player/DAC [internally] upconverts [everything] to DSD 11.2MHz...

Better ? Well, it may be that one favours more-processing.

 

Concerning pursuit of high-fidelity, is DSD the Holy Grail ?

[firedog]

On 8/10/2016 at 11:19 PM, 徐中銳 said:

 

Subtlety of words, conception, what Hiro quoted refers to the goal of less signal-processing

:

Better ? Well, it may be that one favours more-processing.

 

Concerning pursuit of high-fidelity, is DSD the Holy Grail ?

DSD is an alternative hi-res format. Some people prefer the sound, and even upsample PCM to DSD to get the sound they like. Others don't like it as much as "the sound" of PCM.

It depends on personal taste and can also vary acc'd to the playback equipment being used. One one setup I might prefer PCM, on another DSD.

There's no "better" here - even though the "better" arguments are endless. (And a waste of time, IMO).

Listen to what you like. What others like is irrelevant.

[daverich4]

11 hours ago, matador86 said:

Sometimes, Super Audio CD .iso files are offered. An .iso file is an image of full SACD. Some software players like JRiver and Foobar 2000 can play this .iso files although Foobar 2000 needs some extensions in order to playback an SACD .iso file. Just be clear, a physical Super Audio CD also carries DSD files but you cannot read it on a computer. Super Audio CDs can only be read in dedicated players.

 

But you can RIP them and play them back from your computer as DSD files. That’s what I did with mine. 

[mav52]

I agree with firedog, you either like DSD or you don't which is a personal preference, yes,    I like music  and if DSD at the time sounds better than the PCM version who cares, its music.  I've upsampled PCM via my Lumin, sometimes I like it sometimes I prefer the un sampled version.  Not a big deal.

[mfsoa]

I often hear classical music be improved with conversion to DSD via HQPlayer, while with electronic fare it's more "different but is it better?"

[audiventory]

4 hours ago, mfsoa said:

I often hear classical music be improved with conversion to DSD via HQPlayer, while with electronic fare it's more "different but is it better?"

 

The improvement/degradation record of any genre is defined by combination of used:

• hardware's electrical circuits/digital processing and its settings;
• audio resolution (sample rate bit depth);
• losses in conversion algorithm and its settings.

Read details here https://samplerateconverter.com/content/how-improve-sound-quality

[ben446]

I am in the process of switching from a Mytek 192 DSD to a Prism Lyra II (non DSD)  for studio and home listening use.  Using Audirvana, my current DSD tracks are converted in computer in real time and sent to the Lyra as PCM 24/176.4.  In peoples' experience, will the PCM sound as good as the DSD?  My HPs and speakers aren't currently up to the task to accurately A/B.  I am using a JDS Atom HP amp as well.

[firedog]

3 hours ago, ben446 said:

I am in the process of switching from a Mytek 192 DSD to a Prism Lyra II (non DSD)  for studio and home listening use.  Using Audirvana, my current DSD tracks are converted in computer in real time and sent to the Lyra as PCM 24/176.4.  In peoples' experience, will the PCM sound as good as the DSD?  My HPs and speakers aren't currently up to the task to accurately A/B.  I am using a JDS Atom HP amp as well.

When I used the 192 DSD I converted everything to DSD as I thought music sounded better that way. With my present system I think PCM sounds better so I convert everything to PCM. 

 

Bottom line - I don't feel I'm losing anything by listening in 24.176; I think it depends on each person's ears and setup. 

[Miska]

11 hours ago, ben446 said:

I am in the process of switching from a Mytek 192 DSD to a Prism Lyra II (non DSD)  for studio and home listening use.  Using Audirvana, my current DSD tracks are converted in computer in real time and sent to the Lyra as PCM 24/176.4.  In peoples' experience, will the PCM sound as good as the DSD?  My HPs and speakers aren't currently up to the task to accurately A/B.  I am using a JDS Atom HP amp as well.

 

With Lyra, I would recommend sticking to 192k rate, it performs better that way. I think it is running ASRC to convert everything to 192k.

 

Some measurements I've made:

 

 

[ben446]

firedog and Miska,

 

Thank you for the very helpful advice.  Everything at 24/192 sounds really good on the Lyra II > Atom.  After a little EQ in Audirvana, things are really sounding great.

[ben446]

So I got some new headphones (Meze Empyrean) and holly molly do hi rez files on the lyra 2 sound stunning. ( Aurivana 3.5, MBP, usb C) Just fiddling around, I tried going toslink out from a QR1P directly in to the Lyra 2 and things sound much better.  There is no noise or artifacts on the usb, the toslink just has way more detail.  It really sounds live.  I want the library management from the Mac so now I need to try and see if sound over ethernet or some other solution will work. 

 

The struggle is real!